> Warwick Wrote:
> > Or even iron.
Regardless, they must have had at least
> bronze as the Mesopotamian had been using it for
> 1,000yrs before and iron is found in Egypt earlier
> than the iron age and is even mentioned in a 6th
> Dynasty text: "The doors of Pekh-ka which are in
> the abyss open themselves to Pepi, the doors of
> the iron which is the ceiling of the sky open
> themselves to Pepi, and he passeth through them;".
> A smelted iron dagger was found in an Anatolian
> (Hattic) tomb dated to 2500BC and evidence of iron
> use dates further in Mesopotamia to at least
> I think its possible the industrial grade tools
> used iron but the tooling for the grunt work of
> quarrying I do not see as reasonable as the
> temperatures required to make iron usable on a
> large scale were too much.
> Of interest from the same thread:
> [quote]Maybe the key to the AE stone working
> [namely granite] was the discovery of relatively
> small caches of iron, even meteoric, which they
> made into "sacred tools" to build the monuments of
> the gods. Like I said, these tools must have been
> rare meaning they may have only made a handful of
> them given the limited amount of material they
> had. If you take all the granite work at Giza, for
> example, particularly given the fact they had
> ample time to fabricate the blocks, in reality it
> could all be done with just a few saws, lathes,
> If they had only one saw that could only cut one
> block a week this means all of the granite in G1
> could have been easily cut in well less than 2yrs.
> No granite in G1 or G2. The rest of the fine cut
> granite at Giza is found facing the Valley
> Temple-another 2-3yrs? If you took all the cut and
> dressed granite blocks attributed to the 4th
> Dynasty at Giza and Abu Roash, cutting just one
> block a week with one saw, I bet you could easily
> cut all of it in 5yrs or less. 260 blocks. I don't
> know how many blocks of course but for sake of
> argument say it took 10yrs instead. Now imagine
> what you could do with two saws running that each
> could cut two blocks a week. All of the granite
> needed could be cut in a few years which of course
> in reality would only be a few months for each
> So you've got thousands of poor bastards using the
> basic tools we know they used to cut the core
> blocks with 2 saws at the "saw palace" at the
> quarry cutting granite as needed to spec. By the
> time they get to the point they would install the
> granite it would have already been cut and waiting
> for transport which would have obviously been
> planned for as that would have taken time as well.
> At the beginning of the 5th Dynasty we all of
> sudden see round columns-the invention of the
> lathe perhaps?
> I would also bring up again the "renaissance" of
> the NK which we see an explosion of the use of
> granite which just so happens to coincide with the
> increased use of iron in Anaotlia (and elsewhere)
> and the arrival of the Hyksos, likely Hurrians
> from Anatolia, and a few centuries later the
> Hittites of Anatolia of who the AE had extensive
> contact with the NK none greater than the time of
> Ramses II, the greatest builder of them all. I
> don't think this is a coincidence.
> > The arguments re lack of evidence cut both ways
> > that regard.
> The hydraulic nature of the Mediterranean must be
> taken into account when considering the
> possibilities regardless of what is actually found
> in the archaeological record in Egypt as so much
> is missing anyways. This does not give all the
> answers but at least creates a greater baseline to
> work with.
I'll indeed your indeed with a reminder of my view of Giza as a jigsaw puzzle.
Just because one can't see where an individual piece goes is not grounds for determining it doesn't fit anywhere.